Hello Josh,

We have tried this but too many users have issues with the checking of image dimensions remotely. It's too slow for some crappy hosting company The only way that we are going to be able to check on this, is to check the width / height of the image remotely. We can't be downloading all images locally and check them.

Thanks for considering this. Fair enough, perhaps then we can work on the image stretch factor. The image is assigned a width of 96px via the width property. Why not remove the width and keep the max-width? The image will then only get smaller if it's bigger than 96px and will not get bigger in any scenario.

But displaying 1x1 image wouldn't make it look nice either

I understand a 1px by 1px photo for css objects, but who wraps them in image tags? I super tiny image may not look good, but a super pixelated photo looks even worse. At least one is an honest preview of what it looks like.

You would be surprised to see a lot of websites are still pretty old school where their spacers / paddings are still using 1x1 pixel images. Even Facebook does that too

Facebook does this!? Shameful. A 1px icon is similar to a black blank picture.

Hello Josh,

Yes, 1x1 images are normally used to fix issues with older versions of Internet Explorer and yeah, it's a lame fix but it kinda solves lots of issues with IE browsers.